Robbie Hummel

Any And All Things T-Wolves Related
mjs34
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Robbie Hummel

Post by mjs34 »

I am trying to understand the illogical love for this guy. I have seen very little of him, but what I have watched of him, tells me he isn't an NBA caliber player. I have read on this board as well as others that he isn't a scorer, but he is solid. Does solid mean like an orange cone? Because that is what he looks like to me. He isnt' even a tweener because he doesn't seem to have a skillset. Wouldn't our minimal playing time be spent better on Shabazz, and at least getting his feet wet.

Why did this Hummel guy even see the court?
User avatar
longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564]
Posts: 9432
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by longstrangetrip [enjin:6600564] »

He hasn't been very good, but I think the love comes from a few sources. First, the Gopher fans remember how good he was in college and how he used to carve us up the 12 years he was at Purdue. Secondly, Adelman never has anything bad to say about him. And finally, he's a potential feel-good story...hard-working projected lottery pick blows out his knee twice, but finally earns a shot.

Having said all that, I agree that Shabazz should see the court before him. When Jim Pete said Williams was out last night, I thought for sure it would be Muhammad's coming out party. Very disappointed he didn't see the court last night.
User avatar
Q12543 [enjin:6621299]
Posts: 13844
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by Q12543 [enjin:6621299] »

Unfortunately, it's pick your poison for Adelman. He's going with the guy less likely to make stupid mistakes. Hummel is simply a more experienced and mature player right now.

Adelman is now looking down his bench and saying, "who will hurt us the least?". That's what he's reduced to because of no Turiaf, no Budinger, and the utter lack of improvement from Shved and Williams.
mjs34
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by mjs34 »

Could Shabazz be any worse though? I know Flip has said that he will let Adelman coach to win, and he will worry about developing the young guys, but that is contradicting what Flip said in his original interviews and doesn't make a lot of sense. Other teams are playing those same type of players. I think you minimize his mistakes by putting him out with more experienced players.
User avatar
AbeVigodaLive
Posts: 10271
Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by AbeVigodaLive »

q pretty much nails it. I think it was Barreiro who mentioned it on the drive home yesterday.

Sometimes, you just need a guy like Ervin Johnson out there. He won't do much. But he won't fuck anything up either and when you're dealing with guys that low on the proverbial totem pole... sometimes that's better.
mjs34
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by mjs34 »

I just think it is important to realize how we will need to sustain our team for the future. We can't continually go out and sign FA's. We are seeing how that plays out right now with our bench. We have to develop young guys to solidify that area, and that includes finding them minutes.

Why does anyone think Hummel is any less likely to "fuck up" than Shabazz? and even if he does, isnt' there the expectation that Shabazz will work his way through that phase. That is the issue I have with Adelman. His coaching seems to be based on the one game, rather than the season and PO's. We can't win a title with the squad at its current level, so why not try and get the guys minutes that can actually make a significant difference.
User avatar
khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]
Posts: 6414
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by khans2k5 [enjin:6608728] »

I think it is pretty clear that Adelman takes the Aaron Rodger's approach to rookies. He's not just going to throw them out there to see if they can play. He wants them to learn the game from the bench and prove themselves in practice before they play. I understand why people don't like it and even I am not a fan of it now with the second unit's offensive woes happening to be right up in Bazz's wheelhouse to fix (they can't score and that is about all he does even if it is with a high volume). Hummel meanwhile is in year 2 with some professional experience overseas and he is a smart basketball player. Right now he just looks bad because his shot isn't falling, but he is in the DC phase right now where his shot isn't falling so it doesn't look like he belongs out there. DC started to get his shot back last night, so let's hope Hummel does soon. DC and Hummel are guys who don't make a ton of mistakes and play hard every night. They are less risky because of those facts, but also give less reward because they just aren't as talented. Adelman appears to be holding on for dear life until Ronny and Bud come back.
mjs34
Posts: 2408
Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by mjs34 »

Khans, do think when Bud and Ronny come back we are now a contender? I don't believe that.

That's the part of the plan I don't understand. On the KFAN board there is a poll on Hummel and SHabazz, and a couple of the comments are similar to "I don't care as long as we are winning". That is the problem I have with all of this. Everyone knows you want your team to peak at PO time, but that doesn't seem to be our focus. Whether you are winning or not, you should always be trying to improve the team, not to mention it is important to know what you have in the event a trade presents itself. If we arent' going to play the one and done rookies right away, why even draft them in the first place? Why not draft a four year player who is more ready to step in?
User avatar
khans2k5 [enjin:6608728]
Posts: 6414
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by khans2k5 [enjin:6608728] »

We aren't a contender with either of them. Bazz is not miles better than Hummel and Adelman just isn't seeing it. They are on a virtual level playing field and Hummel has the veteran advantage. If we are pinning our title hopes on Bazz, D Will and Dieng developing, then we are done for anyway. This team wasn't built well enough to be a contender and all of the primary role players are locked in for 2,3, and 4 more years. Sorry to say, but Flip messed up the contender status when he gave out 29 million dollars this offseason to 4 guys who aren't all-stars. D Will would be worth more today if he was a number 2 pick who never played because of Love because he played his way out of value. It is a double-edged sword when it comes to playing young guys hoping they can at least become trade bait. Flip put this team together to make the playoffs now and figure out contender status later. Adelman is coaching this team to make the playoffs now and develop his young guys in the offseason. Not every rookie gets better because they were thrown in the fire and came out. Some just stay burned and never recover. At some point you have to trust Adelman even when you don't want to that making them watch the game to become smarter players is better for their development then making them play without knowing what they are doing. We are winning with the current strategy, so there is no reason to risk their young careers just for the sake of playing them. They can go to the D-League to do that which I imagine they will as soon as Ronny comes back so that they both go down at the same time.
User avatar
Camden [enjin:6601484]
Posts: 18065
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:00 am

Re: Robbie Hummel

Post by Camden [enjin:6601484] »

I don't know how many times I have to say this, but can we please play 82 fucking games before we're ruled out as a "contender"? We're six games in and sjm, khans and likely others have already written off the possibility that this team is serious. If we were 1-5, I could see where you're coming from. We're 4-2 with two impressive wins. Six games isn't even a good sample size to say we're a contender. I realize that, but there's the other side of that too. Saying we're not a contender this early is stupid.
Post Reply